Law Prof: Cash Balance Amendments 'Constitutionally
Unsound'

November 11, 2003 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - In an opinion
prepared for a retirement industry trade group, a University
of Chicago law professor asserts that legislative amendments
blocking the government cash balance plan rules are
"substantively and constitutionally unsound."

>According to a news release from the American
Benefits Council, the opinion from Richard Epstein argues
that these amendments – as well as the underlying
Cooper v. IBM
federal district court case (See
Murphy’s Law: IBM
Loses Cash Balance Ruling
) – threaten the “separation of powers” provisions of
the Constitution because they “prevent the President from
faithfully executing the laws and manipulates the appellate
process to deny the judiciary access to the views of the
Treasury Department.”

>A congressional conference committee is expected to
produce a final Treasury/Transportation bill soon. The cash
balance pension plan amendments to that bill – proposed by
Representative Bernard Sanders (I-Vermont) and Senator Tom
Harkin (D-Iowa) – would ban the Treasury Department from
finalizing the proposed regulations on cash balance plans
issued late last year (See
Senate OKs Harkin Cash
Balance Amendment
). The amendments would also hinder a Treasury Department
challenge to the IBM ruling, which claimed that cash
balance plans were age discriminatory.